the snap general election thread

ThinkingOutLoud_2

wotsthat wrote: »

Spoiling your paper sends a message you didn't want to vote for any of the candidates rather than just not being bothered to turn up.

I'm going to be interested to see how many ballot papers will be spoilt. I have an idea it might be higher than usual. I'm not completely decided yet but I think I might spoil my paper for the firs time ever.

Thanks for that.
It is interesting that we have our own diverse perspectives on this whereas other nations are clear that this is way to protect and that sentiment seems to be growing. No one is right for everyone.

http://www.votenone.org.uk/protest_votes_count.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/if-there-s-no-one-you-could-stand-to-vote-for-spoil-your-ballot-today-and-let-your-disillusionment-a7014786.html

No one will know why you spoiled, but it is at least and act of some protect rather than a no show which says you don't care.

wotsthat

Dumping her so close to the election is quite high risk - there's nothing to be gained.

Maybe she is ill? She doesn't look like she enjoys the best of health. High blood pressure/ diabetes? Blood sugar issues would help explain her struggle with basic maths in the police numbers interview.

Conrad

And now the party forecast...

• Conservatives. Seat gain almost certain. Majority almost certain. Plurality almost certain.
• Labour. Seat loss almost certain. Majority very unlikely. Plurality very unlikely.

http://electionforecast.co.uk/

Arklight

ThinkingOutLoud wrote: »

Oops and wow!

You are right social care includes care provided while people are still at home. Tick!

You are 100% wrong that care homes are not included. Nul points.

It is nicely defined here
http://www.ageuk.org.uk/home-and-care/social-care-and-support-where-to-start/introduction/

Do your homework before you sling mud at others.

So while the average stay in a care home is way under 2 years - lower costing partial care may be needed at home before that or not.

Not everyone needs either and some need both.

The Tories social care policy is ostensibly designed so that people can receive social care in their own homes, without an up front payment, for the duration of their life.


The fact that this will involve giving, on average, 50% of their house to an insurance company before they have received a single hour of care, with the premiums to be deducted from the remaining £100k, is somewhat less well publicised.


If you are fine with this then fine. but don't pretend it's anything other than it is. A cynical asset grab.


Virtually no one starts off needing council care in their home and then doesn't need it. If you need 5 hours a week of care this year you will need more next year, and the year after and so on.


Many elderly people will be scared to ask for help due to this policy.

ThinkingOutLoud_2

So with Abbot gone - who is the replacement to take the slightly important post of Home Secretary?

Well, she urged JC to quit and desired his position as untenable.

She has no senior parliamentary post experience.

She screamed expletives at a blind man and his guide dog in the House.

Now suddenly, offered a big pay check and she is willing to serve under him.

What's not to like?

Arklight

Have a butchers at this. Theresa and Philip May shouted at on another embarrassing walk around with her husband.


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/theresa-may-butchers-general-election-boo-heckled-video-smithfields-market-london-a7776461.html

economic

Arklight wrote: »

The Tories social care policy is ostensibly designed so that people can receive social care in their own homes, without an up front payment, for the duration of their life.


The fact that this will involve giving, on average, 50% of their house to an insurance company before they have received a single hour of care, with the premiums to be deducted from the remaining £100k, is somewhat less well publicised.


If you are fine with this then fine. but don't pretend it's anything other than it is. A cynical asset grab.


Virtually no one starts off needing council care in their home and then doesn't need it. If you need 5 hours a week of care this year you will need more next year, and the year after and so on.


Many elderly people will be scared to ask for help due to this policy.

these people that need care would be receiving state pension which would cover a lot of the expenses.

if they own a home, chances are they will have other assets such as a private pension and savings. this can potentially cover the care costs which wont be a huge amount anyway.

ThinkingOutLoud_2

Arklight wrote: »

The Tories social care policy is ostensibly designed so that people can receive social care in their own homes, without an up front payment, for the duration of their life.

You still seem to be missing the fact that social care cost today and ongoing encompasses in home and care home provision.

How do you think people above the asset limit pay for this care today? Magic money?

The material change is the inclusion of your home and the asset limit going up by around a multiple of four. But many borrow against their home today rather than face council care.

Whether that is right depends very much on your views and perhaps your wealth - some will win and some will lose - those who rent or who live in cheaper property areas will win.

Arklight

ThinkingOutLoud wrote: »

So with Abbot gone - who is the replacement to take the slightly important post of Home Secretary?

Well, she urged JC to quit and desired his position as untenable.

She has no senior parliamentary post experience.

She screamed expletives at a blind man and his guide dog in the House.

Now suddenly, offered a big pay check and she is willing to serve under him.

What's not to like?

I don't think anyone is pretending that Jeremy has a great deal to choose from at the moment with regards to front bench positions.


I am pro-Corbyn and would like a Labour government but I can't pretend the Parliamentary Labour Party, for the most part, has given a good account of itself over the last two years.


Were there to be a Labour government some of the big hitters would return to form a cabinet fairly quickly.


Personally I am not especially keen on Diane Abbot but would still rather see her on a front bench than Theresa May, Liam Fox, Jeremy Hunt, or Boris Johnnson. None of whom are exactly sparkling with brilliance themselves.

Arklight

ThinkingOutLoud wrote: »

You still seem to be missing the fact that social care cost today and ongoing encompasses in home and care home provision.

How do you think people above the asset limit pay for this care today? Magic money?

The material change is the inclusion of your home and the asset limit going up by around a multiple of four. But many borrow against their home today rather than face council care.

Whether that is right depends very much on your views and perhaps your wealth - some will win and some will lose - those who rent or who live in cheaper property areas will win.

You seem to be missing the point that that there currently exists a cap on care costs up to the last £23,250 of cash savings. If you move into a care home, something which is quite likely to happen after some considerable period of home care has elapsed, then the value of your home can be taken into account in means testing.


Under this semi U-turned mess of a policy the Tories are proposing, the value of your home - less £100k will have a lien applied to it the moment you ask for social care you cannot pay for. You'll then pay the interest on this loan out of the remaining £100k on your death, which could well wipe out all the assets you wanted to leave behind. While there might be some supposed cap on fees, there will be no cap on the compound interest.


I think forcing old people who've worked their whole lives to clear their debts, and pay their taxes to take out a loan on their house and then have to watch it balloon as punishment the longer they live, stinks.


All the pensioners I have spoken to think it stinks too. Under Labour it wouldn't happen.


We'll find out tomorrow whether it's enough to stop them voting Tory.